If I want to apply it to ProviderReplacement and other types, is there a smarter way to do so?

Do you mean pass ProviderReplacement to this function instead of Replacement? In that case, I see two options:

• Make the function generic and introduce some kind of Replacement trait:

  fn try_block_contains_undeprecated_attribute<T: Replacement>(
       try_node: &StmtTry,
       replacement: &T,
       semantic: &SemanticModel,
  ) -> bool { /* ... */ }
  
  trait Replacement {
      fn module(&self) -> &str;
      fn name(&self) -> &str;
   }

• Pass module and name directly to the function:

  fn try_block_contains_undeprecated_attribute(
       try_node: &StmtTry,
       module: &str,
       name: &str,
       semantic: &SemanticModel,
  ) -> bool { /* ... */ }

These both assume that you just need module and name from the Replacement types, but that seems to be the case. I think the second option is a bit easier if there are only a few fields. A trait is probably overkill.

Do you mean pass ProviderReplacement to this function instead of Replacement? In that case, I see two options:

• Make the function generic and introduce some kind of Replacement trait:

  fn try_block_contains_undeprecated_attribute<T: Replacement>(
       try_node: &StmtTry,
       replacement: &T,
       semantic: &SemanticModel,
  ) -> bool { /* ... */ }
  
  trait Replacement {
      fn module(&self) -> &str;
      fn name(&self) -> &str;
   }

• Pass module and name directly to the function:

  fn try_block_contains_undeprecated_attribute(
       try_node: &StmtTry,
       module: &str,
       name: &str,
       semantic: &SemanticModel,
  ) -> bool { /* ... */ }

These both assume that you just need module and name from the Replacement types, but that seems to be the case. I think the second option is a bit easier if there are only a few fields. A trait is probably overkill.